A colleague of mine has had this issue and the building company replaced all the nails, took a week or so ( he is in a lifestyle village ) and they had to do more than just his place.

Before going too far, dig out all you paperwork and consult your lawyer.

You lawyer will know ( hopefully ) the best path to take.

It might cost you a couple of grand but they should be able to get action faster than you going in saying the building act or whatever. The lawyer wil be able to say yes you have a case, not you dont have a case or under this act section, paragraph etc.

John

Thanks!

The fact that I fixed a couple myself, would that be an issue? I now regret doing it, but I thought the problem was only small and I didn't want to make a big deal out of it.

tchart: they will likely have more clout in getting something done.

boland:

 

Would it mean all nails would have to be replaced? 

 

Yup, Sorry - or at least treated in a way the rust doesn't show (if it offends you that is)

If they weren't galvanised in the first place or the cheap thin overseas galv has weathered or the architect didn't spec or or or...

You MIGHT have a claim against the perpetrator - but proving and enforcing the claim is whole nother thing again.

I would not be holding my breath

I would not be throwing money at lawyers.

The simplest solution is to renail the wall entirely and seal and hide the rust marks if you want.

Just my $0.02

boland: The fact that I fixed a couple myself, would that be an issue?

That sounds pretty weird. When we had our deck built at least 15 years ago the builder stuck a nail in the brick near the door (been meaning to pull it out) as a guide and it's still there and unrusted. It's definitely not stainless. Ditto the nails in the deck itself. Every once in a while one pops a bit and we hammer it back down. We're close enough to the sea to hear it but it's still a couple k away.

JayADee:

 

That sounds pretty weird. When we had our deck built at least 15 years ago the builder stuck a nail in the brick near the door (been meaning to pull it out) as a guide and it's still there and unrusted. It's definitely not stainless. Ditto the nails in the deck itself. Every once in a while one pops a bit and we hammer it back down. We're close enough to the sea to hear it but it's still a couple k away.

 

boland:

 

Thanks!

 

The fact that I fixed a couple myself, would that be an issue? I now regret doing it, but I thought the problem was only small and I didn't want to make a big deal out of it.

 

Without seeing photos it's hard to know how bad your problem is.

If you have no luck with the builder it may cost you more that it's worth to get a lawyer involved and then you may still be no further ahead.

Rust only occurs when moisture comes in contact with the steel in the nail. As others have mentioned there are plenty of old houses that never used galvanised nails and they don't have a problem with rust. However the nails were sealed from the moisture.

So long as the nail hasn't started to blister or flake with rust I'd wait till the weather is a bit drier to allow any moisture that's near the nails to dry out. Then use something like a good putty, or even one of the Selleys "No More Gaps" products, to seal the nail hole and then repaint the wall, priming the nail hole area first with a good primer. I'm assume the nails were punched below the timber surface to start with. Perhaps they weren't, if not that needs doing first. 

This is likely to be cheaper than paying a lawyer.

personally - you use a builder because the law is asking you to. otherwise I would not even go close to one.

They are generally a bunch of incompetent liars, hiding behind their respective professional bodies. When things go wrong, not the builder and not their professional body will ever agree they got it wrong. It will always be your fault even if you have no idea what they do or what they are supposed to do, and if you want to check up on them they complain of "micro-management".

I speak from my own experience, having employed one of the glorified "registered builder" in West Auckland for a house extension. The cladding at the bottom left the joists exposed (it was finishing approx 100mm ABOVE the underside of the joists). I told him this does not look OK and it is very ugly (that is right in front of the house!!). He smiled and replied that I could paint the paper same colour with the cladding... and then on a more serious note told me "do you know how hard is to fix that now??" And he moved on. Later he claimed that I asked him to do it that way.

You can literally see light from inside the house through the wall/  soffit junction before installing the gib. The drawings detail an "eaves mould" to be installed in that corner to seal that area but this was not installed. I did the exterior painting, and the builder claimed that me (as a painter) was supposed to fill that junction with sealant !! The cladding and the soffit are two different colours and two different materials but he still claimed that is was my job to seal that junction and I did not do it for aesthetic reasons !

He was also paid to build the structure for a deck. This excluded decking installation and consequently he did not give a dam about the issues he creates for whoever was going to install the decking (he knew that would be me). Drawings have no indication about the sides not being parallel, they are clearly parallel on the drawings, but he still did not know what he is doing; He "lost" over 350mm over approx 10m. Plus very poorly "aligned" members in the structure which took lots of planing or even remove and nail it in the correct position.

All this was documented by a registered building surveyor and submitted to the Licensed Building Practitioners Board along with a complaint. Guess their reply... the matter does not require to be investigated. What the... ???

As long as these professional bodies make a living from the fees these guys pay every year, they will have no incentive to reduce their revenue stream by punishing shoddy workmanship (which is actually the norm "out there", we just do not see it until we are involved in the process). If they start punishing bad behavior then why would the trades pay for membership? They are members simply because they know it will defend them and they actually pay for a license to rip off everyone out there without any remorse.

Just for clarity, these are kiwi born and trained "builders" (PM me separately if you or anyone you know want to be on the safe side and avoid them).

so back to the original thread with the rusty nails - of course they are not supposed to rust, but there will be no way you can pin this on anyone. Bad luck. And correct me if I am wrong - but the key word is the "unconditional" in the terms of the sale of a property. You buy it "unconditional". A good lawyer "in bed with the builder" would easily argue that this concept waives any responsibility for the builder when the house is sold? Or is this warranty transmissible to the next owner?

i would have thought the pre cladding inspection would have picked that up. or the post cladding.

Currently dealing with EWRB for an electrical complaint which was logged back in June. couple of emails and should be looked at in September with report to follow. A month later nothing.